The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-03-19


For thy sake we are killed,
all the day long;
We are accounted as sheep,
for the slaughter.
Nay. in ali these things we are more than
corquerors, through him that loved us. For
am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor
angels, nor principalities, nor things present,
nor things to come, nor powers, nor height,
nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able
to separate us from the love of God, which is
in Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom. viii 3d. 39.l
This is one of the most important
passages in the New Testament. Two
prominent topics are introduced-hrst,
our love for Christ, which is another
name for our love for God and second,
Gods love for us which is in Christ
Jesus our Lord. In other words, Jesus
Christ is the medium of the love on
both sides. We love God chiefly as we
see him in his Son, "the brightness
of bis glory, and the express image of
his person. On the other hand, the
love of God for us is chiefly manifested
through the Redeemer.
Several considerations show that this
view of the two sources, and the two
objects Of love, is correct. 1t is true
that the words, love of Christ Or of
God, are ambiguous. They may mean
the love Of Christ or Of God for us or
our love for Christ or for God. Paul
knew this, and employed, besides these,
other words that clearly define his mean
ing. That the love of men for Christ,
and not the love Of Christ for men, is
the meaning, in the first part OF this
passage, is shown chiefly by the things
mentioned as tending to separate the
former from this love.
Tribulation, anguish, persecution,
famine, nakedness, peril and sword,
are the things named. Paul never
would have suggested the possibility of
any of these separating US from the love
of Christ, if he had not meant the love
of Christ for US. Besides, we must re-
member that Christ had suffered these
things, and had entered into his glory.
But Paul was writing of things occur
ring in his own day. The Christians
were then suffering all the things here
named. Possibly he had known few
instances Of relapse from the love of
Christ, ON account of these hardships
and privations. Surely there were not
many such. or he would not have an
swered his own question as he did:
may, in all these things we are more
than conquerors," etc.
One may be inclined to ask why Paul
makes Christ the object Of love from
Christians, rather than God. In the
first place "God" instead of "Christ, "is in
some of the early manuscripts. But as
the latter is more likely correct, the
reason may be the same as when he
speaks of the love of God to men in the
latter part of the passage, and adds: I'm
Christ Jesus our Lord" 1t was as true
of Christians, that they loved God in
Christ Jesus our Lord, as it was that
God loved Christians Tor rather showed
his love) through that medium. In no
respect, more clearly than in this, was
Jesus mediator between God and man.
will now proceed to notice the love
OF God, as set before us in the latter
part of Paul's description. He had said
in closing the first part: "We are more
than conquerors through him that loved
u.s." This shows that it is the love of
God for us, and not our love for him,
which he was about to describe. And
it is worthy of remark, that he intro
duces this subject very differently from
what he did the other. In regard to the
love of Christians for Christ, he had
put his words into the form of a ques-
ton, Who shall separate us Shall
tribulation, or anguish, etc. ? 1t may
be thought an improperly to begin with
a0hO, and then proceed with things, to
which ,Oho will not apply. Perhaps the
reason was, that persons would be re-
quired to bring upon them tribulation,
anguish, persecution, and the other
evils. Or, perhaps, he meant to say,
that neither the persons, nor the things,
would be able to separate them. But
without dwelling on this point, wish
the reader to observe, that he asks the
question, Shall these things separate
US from the love of Christ ? There was
more or less uncertainty about it, Not
so in the other instance. Here he states
what he believes as a fixed fact. 81 am
persuaded" he says, one was change
in name; the other change in God
quite difference.
l. He was persuaded that neither
death nor life would be able to separate
us from the love of God. Ordinarily,
if we had occasion to mention these
two things, we would say, neither life
nor death but evidently for his pur-
pose, death was the more important,
and, therefore, named first. In his day
as in ours, death was thought to have
great influence on the love of God for !
men. Those who would not love him |
before death, would cease to be loved |
by him after that event. But Paul
says: He is persuaded, that this is not
II, -